Agenda
Board of Regents
Facilities and Land Management Committee
Thursday, September 18, 2008; *1:00 p.m. – 4:30 p.m.
106 Lee Gorsuch Commons
University of Alaska Anchorage
Anchorage, Alaska
*Times for meetings are subject to modifications within the September 17-19, 2008 timeframe.
Committee Members:
Michael Snowden, Committee Chair
Timothy Brady, Committee Vice Chair
Fuller Cowell
I.
Call to Order
II.
Adoption of Agenda
Robert Martin
Kirk Wickersham
Mary Hughes, Board Chair
MOTION
"The Facilities and Land Management Committee adopts the agenda as
presented.
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
Call to Order
Adoption of Agenda
Full Board Consent Agenda
A.
Formal Project Approval for the Anderson Building Remodel
and Pedestrian Crossing at the University of Alaska Southeast
B.
Schematic Design Approval for the TVCC Revitalization Phase
3 Exterior Envelope at the University of Alaska Fairbanks
New Business
A.
Formal Project Approval for the Northwest Campus Deferred
Renewal at the Northwest Campus in Nome, Alaska
Ongoing Issues
A.
Status Report on University Investments in Capital Facilities,
Construction in Progress, and Other Projects
B.
Update on IT Issues
C.
Update on University of Alaska Fairbanks Master Plan
Future Agenda Items
Adjourn
This motion is effective September 18, 2008."
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 1 of 21
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
III.
Full Board Consent Agenda
A.
Formal Project Approval for the Anderson Building Remodel and
Pedestrian Crossing at the University of Alaska Southeast
The President recommends that:
MOTION
"As required by Regents’ Policy 05.12.04, the Facilities and Land
Management Committee recommends that the Board of Regents
approve the formal Project Approval request for the University of
Alaska Southeast Anderson Building Remodel and Pedestrian
Crossing Improvements as presented, and authorize the university
administration to proceed through schematic design not to exceed a
Total Project Cost of $10,700,000. This motion is effective September
18, 2008."
POLICY CITATION
In accordance with Regents’ Policy 05.12.04, Formal Project Approval
(FPA) represents approval of the Project including the program
justification and need, scope, the Total Project Cost (TPC), and funding
plan for the project. It also represents authorization to complete the
development of the project through the schematic design, targeting the
approved scope and budget, unless otherwise designated by the approval
authority.
A FPA is required for all projects with an estimated TPC in excess of $2.5
million in order for that project’s inclusion of construction funding to be
included in the university’s capital budget request, unless otherwise
approved by the Board. The level of approval required shall be based
upon TPC as follows:




TPC > $4 million will require approval by the Board based on
recommendations from the Facilities and Land Management
Committee (F&LMC).
TPC > $2 million but ≤ $4 million will require approval by the
F&LMC.
TPC > $1 million but ≤ $2 million will require approval by the
Chairperson of the F&LMC.
TPC ≤ $1 million will require approval by the university’s Chief
Finance Officer (CFO) or designee.
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 2 of 21
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
RATIONALE/RECOMMENDATION
1.
Background
The programs that constitute Arts and Sciences at UAS have a significant
leadership position and set of responsibilities in the UAS mission as a
teaching and learning-led institution. This mission focuses institutional
energies and strategy on the development and provision of excellent
learning environments and communities for our students and faculty.
Within that general focus, science programs occupy a special place in the
identity of the University and the challenge of its mission, particularly
given the unique marine location that is Juneau. In addition, the existing
running seawater system in the building, fed directly from Auke Bay, is a
unique asset to marine science programs. The program for the remodeled
building should make the most of this capability.
Based on its unique setting, science programs at UAS offer important
opportunities to build enriching undergraduate research and project-based
learning experiences directly linked to the goal of academic excellence in
a teaching and learning-led institution. Within this context, all majors can
benefit from the strength of the science curriculum.
The remodeling of the Anderson Building into a modernized science
facility presents an essential opportunity for UAS to further its strengths
and core values around the mission of building a teaching and learning-led
institution that, as a result, uniquely and effectively serves the higher
education imperatives of the southeast region and state of Alaska.
These considerations lead to the following operational priorities for the
remodel proposal:
1st priority: the remodeled building is to provide facilities that enhance
the quality of the science teaching programs and classrooms, and;
2nd priority: to provide space to enhance the undergraduate research
experience and opportunities for project-based learning with faculty.
The current project builds on work accomplished in the past five years that
identified a goal to advance and achieve further recognition for excellence
of the UAS programs in biology, marine biology, and environmental
sciences.
There is an important need to refine program offerings at UAS, including
its science programs, to ensure that they contribute to the imperatives of
program quality and growth in a teaching and learning-led institution.
Given the Juneau setting and the strength of its faculty, the biological and
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 3 of 21
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
environmental science programs provide important opportunities for
recruiting students not only within the region and state, but also to attract
students from outside of the southeast region as well as outside of the state
to UAS
These twin imperatives of quality and growth are clearly articulated in
strategic documents and planning activities at UAS, particularly, “The
Study for an Expanded Science Facility (August 2002)” and “UAS: The
Next Decade: Strategic Plan for the University of Alaska Southeast 20002010”.
UAS Strategic Goals
In “Strategic Plan for the UAS 2000-2010,” a set of key strategic goals
were developed by the University community and approved by the Board
of Regents to provide a roadmap for the continuing success and growth of
the University. Several of these goals directly relate to the development of
the facilities and are encompassed in the current Anderson Building
project including:
Goal One: Student Success
“The University will provide the learning environment, support systems,
academic programs, facilities, technology, and faculty to enhance the
learning opportunities for students, who have diverse needs, interests,
capabilities, and ambitions.“
Goal Two: Faculty & Staff Strength
“The University will recruit, develop and retain a culturally diverse
faculty and staff who bring excellence to our teaching, research, and
service through innovative and mission-focused academic programs and
services.”
To accomplish this goal, the University supports “faculty to grow in their
discipline through research and scholarship, and professional
engagement”. The university also seeks to “assist faculty in integrating
technology into instruction that leads to enhanced learning.”
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 4 of 21
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
Goal Three: Educational Quality
“In an effort to increase retention and attract new students, bachelor
degree programs have expanded and now include liberal arts, English,
social science, mathematics, biology, marine biology, and environmental
science. Each program emphasizes experiential learning and mentoring
relationships with faculty to take advantage of favorable student to faculty
ratio and the campus’ unique location.
“The UAS will offer the highest quality programs, from non-degree
training to graduate degrees. Our campuses will provide the highest
possible quality programs and services within their respective missions.
UAS recognizes that the traditional liberal arts education is more
important now than ever as it provides students with the critical thinking
skills and the foundation necessary to be prepared to meet rapid changing
work, cultural, and social environments. The liberal arts education at UAS
helps students develop skills in self-examination, imagination, and
citizenship.”
Existing Facilities
The majority of UAS Juneau Campus specialized science teaching space is
located in the Anderson Building on Auke Bay. The Anderson Building
occupies a lovely and unique site on Auke Bay. The building has a
saltwater supply system that is currently one of only two such systems in
Southeast Alaska. The Anderson Building was constructed in two phases.
The first two floors were constructed in 1976 and the third floor was
added in 1980. The total gross square feet of the building is 15,608.
The Anderson Building has been occupied until recently by both the UAS
Science Department and the UAF School of Fisheries & Ocean Sciences
(SFOS). The SFOS is moving to a new location with the completion of
their new facilities at Lena Point. Because of the age of the Anderson
Building, and the fact that SFOS is moving out the building in 2008, the
University has an opportunity to make major programmatic and technical
improvements to the Anderson Building at this time.
UAS currently offers Bachelor degrees in Biology, Environmental Science
and Marine Biology. The 2001 UAS Campus Master Plan anticipates that
science enrollment (headcount) will approximately double between 2005
and 2012.
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 5 of 21
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
During the planning process for the Anderson Building Remodel all of the
University’s science education program delivery spaces were examined to
determine the best mix of those spaces to be located in the Anderson
Building.
2.
Project Scope
The Anderson Building Remodel project will require the rehabilitation of
most of the existing 15,608 GSF building. Since November 2007,
ECI/Hyer Inc. has been meeting with UAS administration, faculty,
students and staff to prepare a program of all UAS science space as
envisioned for the year 2015. The resulting program document establishes
space use priorities for rehabilitation of the Anderson Building and lists
pertinent attributes of each space, including: area in net square feet, all
finish materials, environmental criteria, building systems, equipment and
furnishings.
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 6 of 21
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
Final Concept Program – Stacking Diagram
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 7 of 21
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
Additional Life Cycle Replacement and Energy Conservation
Considerations
Because of the building’s age, virtually all of the Anderson Building’s
systems are nearing the end of their anticipated lifespan, and are due to
require replacement in the near term. So it is appropriate, and
advantageous that maintenance and operational improvements will be
made to the Anderson Building as a part of the project. These
improvements will address issues related to sustainability, energy use and
efficiency, fire safety, life cycle costs, accessibility, and hazardous
materials. Work items that will be analyzed as part of the initial design
phases include:











Improve parking lot and site circulation
Replace roof
Upgrade windows
Upgrade elevator
Renovate heating & ventilating systems
Upgrade saltwater system
Replace reverse osmosis system
Provide new electrical panel and main distribution system
Replace Gen set/transfer switch
Provide cable tray system for data/communications
Replace fire alarm system
Pedestrian Crossing Improvements
Alaska DOT&PF prepared a reconnaissance study in 2004 (ABCOR) that
included this segment of the Glacier Highway and recommended that
increased pedestrian amenities be provided. Improving student access to
the Anderson Building is a major component of the project. Parking is
limited at the Anderson Building. Many building users park on campus
and walk to the building. To get to the building pedestrians must cross
Glacier Highway where traffic moves at speeds of 40 to 50 MPH and sight
lines are short due to the curvature of the highway. This project proposes
improvements that provide for safe pedestrian access to the Anderson
Building. A pedestrian overpass or underpass, and improved on grade
crossings and sidewalks are being considered.
This project considers three alternate improvements that would provide for
safe pedestrian access to the Anderson Building. A pedestrian overpass or
underpass, and improved on grade crossings and sidewalks are being
considered.
On Grade Crossing: DOT&PF’s preliminary analysis of improvements
considered for the Glacier Highway incorporate a realignment of the curve
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 8 of 21
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
moving the roadway closer to the main campus. DOT&PF analysis also
suggests creating roundabouts at the intersection of the Glacier Highway
with Fritz Cove Road and DeHarts. The introduction of roundabouts gains
the support of DOT&PF to incorporate on-grade crossing of the highway.
This support is due to reduced travel speeds associated with a roundabout,
reduced distance to cross single lanes of traffic, and the creation of a safe
zone in the center of the roundabout for the pedestrian to time their
crossing. Reliance on the roundabout solution to access the Anderson
Building would require the addition of sidewalk along the highway
between the roundabout and the Anderson Building. The availability of
right-of-way combined with step shoulder gradient along the highway
increase the costs associated with this crossing option.
A project that incorporated the roadway realignment at the same time the
roundabouts were built would most likely provide the needed right-of way
for the necessary sidewalk.
Elevated Crossing: Provide a bridge that crosses the Glacier Highway in
the vicinity of the Anderson Building. The transition from the main
campus to the Anderson Building offers a grade differential that might
eliminate stairs or an elevator to access the crossing on the main campus
side. Overhead utility lines exist on the Anderson Building side of the
highway that may require relocation to facilitate the bridge structure. The
ultimate solution would be to extend the bridge walkway to the Anderson
Building and utilize the elevator access in the building to transition to
grade level. The issues of building security and use by other than the
university population may limit this function.
Depressed Crossing: Construct a tunnel under the Glacier Highway. This
option would avoid interference with overhead utility lines but may result
in longer walkway distances to reach grade levels at each terminus.
DOT&PF’s most recent position has been that the construction of
improvements recommended in their reconnaissance report are not in their
current short term funding plan. However DOT&PF received a general
fund appropriation in FY09 for project design of the general corridor
improvements. In addition there is a $5 million allocation of construction
funding included in a statewide transportation bond issuance for the
Mendenhall Loop Road intersection.
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 9 of 21
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
3.
Proposed Cost and Funding Source(s)
An allocation of $500,000 was received in FY08 for planning and
$10,000,000 was received in FY09 for design and construction.
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 10 of 21
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
4.
Estimated Total Project Cost
UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA
Project Name: Anderson Building Remodel
MAU:
UAS
Building:
Anderson Building
Date:
Campus: Juneau
Prepared By:
Project Title:
Account No.:
Total GSF Affected by Project:
15,608
PROJECT BUDGET
A. Professional Services
Consultant Basic Services
12.0%
Construction Phase Services
2.0%
Site Survey
Plan Review / Permits
Professional Services Subtotal
B. Construction
General Construction Contract(s)
Pedestrian improvements
Construction Contingency
10.0%
Art
0.5%
Construction Subtotal
Construction Cost per GSF
C. Equipment and Furnishings
Classroom Equipment
Other Furnishings
Make Ready/Move In
Equipment and Furnishings Subtotal
D. Administrative Costs
Temporary relocation costs
Project Management
6%
Administrative Costs Subtotal
E. Total Project Cost
Total Project Cost per GSF
F. Total Appropriation(s)
5/1/2008
Gerken
Original
$955,000
$159,000
$35,000
$1,149,000
$5,920,000
$2,040,000
$800,000
$40,000
$8,800,000
564
$75,000
$50,000
$10,000
$135,000
$0
$610,000
$610,000
$10,694,000
685
$10,700,000
5.
Maintenance and Operating Costs (M&R)
Maintenance and operating costs of the building are expected to be
reduced as a consequence of this project.
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 11 of 21
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
6.
Consultants
The lead consultant for the design of the project is the Anchorage based
architectural firm of ECI/Hyer, Inc. The ECI/Hyer, Inc. design team for
this project includes:
Lab Programming & Design:
Civil Engineering:
Structural Engineering:
Mechanical Engineering:
Electrical Engineering:
NBBJ
R&M Engineering, Inc.
Reid Middleton
Murray & Associates, PC
Haight & Associates
7.
Other Cost of Consideration
Occupants of the building will be affected by the remodel. A logistical
approach to the implementation of the remodel work will be developed
during the later design phases. The construction work is likely to be
accomplished in phases with the most disruptive work efforts scheduled
during summer and Christmas breaks.
8.
Schedule for Completion
The anticipated schedule for the building remodel is as follows:
Design Period
October 1, 2008 – January 8, 2009
SD
October 1, 2008 – November 1, 2008
DD
November 1, 2008 – November 21, 2008
95% CD
December 5, 2008 – December 19, 2008
100% CD
December 19, 2008 – January 8, 2009
Bid Period
January 8, 2009 – February 5, 2009
Contract Award
February 15, 2009
Construction Period
May 15, 2009 – August 15, 2010
Beneficial Occupancy
August 22, 2010
The schedule for the pedestrian access project will require additional
coordination with and commitments from the Alaska Department of
Transportation & Public Facilities.
9.
Action Requested
Approval to develop the project documents through schematic design.
10.
Supporting Documents
UAS Anderson Building Remodel & Pedestrian Crossing Improvements,
ECI/Hyer l NBBJ, August 11, 2008:
http://www.uas.alaska.edu/facilities_services/fpc/andremod/andersonfinal.
pdf
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 12 of 21
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
B.
Schematic Design Approval for the TVCC Revitalization Phase 3 Exterior
Envelope at the University of Alaska Fairbanks
Reference 7
The President recommends that:
MOTION
“As required by Regents’ Policy 05.12.04, the Facilities and Land
Management Committee recommends that the Board of Regents
approve the Schematic Design Approval for the University of Alaska
Fairbanks Tanana Valley Campus Center Revitalization Phase 3
Exterior Envelope for a total project cost not to exceed $7,000,000.
This motion is effective September 18, 2008.”
POLICY CITATION
In accordance with Regents’ Policy 05.12.04, Schematic Design Approval
(SDA) represents approval of the location of the facility, its relationship to
other facilities, the functional relationship of interior areas, the basic
design including construction materials, mechanical, electrical, technology
infrastructure, and telecommunications systems, and any other changes to
the project since Formal Project Approval.
Unless otherwise designated by the approval authority or a Material
Change in the project is subsequently identified, SDA also represents
approval of the proposed cost of the next phase(s) of the project and
authorization to complete the Construction Documents process, to bid and
award a contract within the approved budget, and to proceed to completion
of project construction. Provided, however, if a Material Change in the
project is subsequently identified, such change will be subject to the
approval process described below.
For the Schematic Design Approval, if there has been no Material Change
in the project since the Formal Project Approval, approval levels shall be
as follows:

TPC > $4 million will require approval by the Facilities and Land
Management Committee (F&LMC).

TPC > $2 million but ≤ $4 million will require approval by the
chair of the F&LMC.

TPC ≤ $2 million will require approval by the university’s Chief
Finance Officer (CFO) or designee.
If there has been a Material Change in the project since the Formal Project
Approval, the Schematic Design approval levels shall be the same as the
Formal Project Approval.
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 13 of 21
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
RATIONALE / RECOMMENDATION
1.
Narrative Description
The UAF Tanana Valley Campus Center at 604 Barnette Street in
Fairbanks, Alaska (formerly the Fairbanks Courthouse) was designed and
constructed in 1962-63. The building has four stories plus a mechanical
penthouse with a total of 78,504 gross square feet. Since taking ownership
in 2003, the university has accomplished a series of two state-funded
projects and two additional projects funded by the Denali Commission.
The second state-funded project, Phase 2 Mechanical and Electrical
Upgrades, is in the final stage of completion.
The Phase 3 Exterior Envelope project will replace the entire existing
exterior building envelope and windows, which have failed.
The existing exterior wall system consists of enamel coated aluminum
storefront panels with an R-value of no more than 4. The panels enclose
asbestos containing materials (ACM) that provide most of the insulating
value. Hazardous materials handling methods will be employed for
demolition and disposal of the panels. The exterior aluminum windows
have deteriorated and are beginning to fall out of the exterior skin. The
storefront system also acts as the building’s vapor barrier which is not
continuous, and is leaking. The poor wall system and inconsistent vapor
barrier have led to some corrosion of the structural systems, access for
mold, drafty and uncomfortable spaces, and poor use of energy.
The new wall system will be an Exterior Insulation Finish System (EIFS)
integrated with a pre-fabricated, lift-in-place panel system. The system is
medium priced with many advantages including low maintenance,
durability, excellent thermal performance, and site assembly methods that
result in minimum exposure of the building interior during construction.
The new panel system will connect to the structural connection points of
the existing curtain wall system, and will provide an R-21 insulation value
and a continuous vapor barrier at the perimeter of the entire facility.
The new windows will be fixed double pane, argon filled, low E-coated,
high performance (HP) insulated windows with extruded aluminum
(thermal break) frames. There are approximately 224 windows and
replacement will improve both function and aesthetics. Each window will
have a separate window shade.
All storefront and insulated hollow metal doors will be replaced as part of
this project. Storefront interior and exterior doors, sidelights and transoms
will be replaced with insulated, thermal break (HP) systems. The
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 14 of 21
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
building’s exterior electrical equipment will be replaced with colorcorrected, high pressure sodium lights and new headbolt outlets on control
points for energy conservation.
The exterior look of the building will take on a 21st century, modernized
look utilizing a series of linear and square/rectangular panels. The
existing penthouse and building parapets will also be modified to tie into
the building design.
Window sizes will allow for day lighting deeper into the building spaces
including the programmed student lounge areas. An insulated, translucent
wall system will be installed on the exterior wall where the main stair is
located at the east end of the facility (Barnette Street). Daylight will
penetrate into the building through the panels while still maintaining a
thermal buffer from the exterior cold.
Replacement of the exterior envelope will impact the interior perimeter
hydronic heating system and various architectural, mechanical, and
electrical aspects of the interior rooms. The impact to these systems and
areas will be addressed as needed by this project.
2.
Graphic Description
See Reference 7.
3.
Proposed Cost and Funding Source(s)
UAF & TVC
SB 221 SLA08 FY09 General Fund Appropriation
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 15 of 21
$7,000,000
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
4.
Estimated Total Project Cost
UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA
Project Name: TVCC Revitalization Phase 3 Exterior Envelope
MAU:
UAF
Building:
#655 TVCC
Date:
August 19, 2008
Campus:
UAF TVC
Prepared By:
M. Schuetz
Project #:
2008190 TVEE
Account No.:
TBD
Total GSF Affected by Project:
78504
PROJECT BUDGET
Original
A. Professional Services
Consultant Basic Services
$482,000
Consultant Extra Services
$0
Site Survey
$0
Soils Engineering
$0
Testing
$8,000
Plan Review / Permits
$62,000
Other
$0
Professional Services Subtotal
$552,000
B. Construction
General Contractor
$5,185,000
Other Contractors
$38,000
Construction Contingency
$518,500
Art
$0
Other (Interim Space Needs)
$0
Construction Subtotal
$5,741,500
Construction Cost per GSF
$73.14
C. Equipment and Furnishings
Equipment
$0
Furnishings
$0
Make Ready/Move In
$0
Equipment and Furnishings Subtotal
$0
D. Administrative Costs
Advance Planning
$0
Misc. Expenses
$15,682
Parking/Staging
$30,000
Project Management
$660,818
Administrative Costs Subtotal
$706,500
E. Total Project Cost
$7,000,000
Total Project Cost per GSF
$89.17
F. Total Appropriation(s)
$7,000,000
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 16 of 21
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
5.
Variance Report
None
6.
Schedule for Completion
Design Development (65%)
Construction Documents (95%)
Bid Documents (100%)
Bid Period
Construction
Occupancy
October 10, 2008
December 5, 2008
January 5, 2009
January 11 to March 15, 2009
March 15 to October 31, 2009
Continuous Coordinated Occupancy
7.
Affirmation
The Board of Regents gave Formal Project Approval at the June 2008
meeting.
8.
Action Requested
Schematic Design Approval by the Facilities and Land Management
Committee and Board of Regents.
IV.
New Business
A.
Formal Project Approval for the Northwest Campus Deferred Renewal at
the Northwest Campus in Nome, Alaska
Reference 8
The President recommends that:
MOTION
“As required by Regents’ Policy 05.12.04, the Facilities and Land
Management Committee approves the Formal Project Approval
request for the University of Alaska Fairbanks Northwest Campus
Deferred Renewal as presented, and authorizes the University
administration to proceed through schematic design (SD) not to
exceed a Total Project Cost of $3,500,003. This motion is effective
September 18, 2008.”
POLICY CITATION
In accordance with Regents’ Policy 05.12.04, Formal Project Approval
(FPA) represents approval of the Project including the program
justification and need, scope, the Total Project Cost (TPC), and funding
plan for the project. It also represents authorization to complete the
development of the project through the schematic design, targeting the
approved scope and budget, unless otherwise designated by the approval
authority.
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 17 of 21
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
A FPA is required for all projects with an estimated TPC in excess of $2.5
million in order for that project’s inclusion of construction funding to be
included in the university’s capital budget request, unless otherwise
approved by the Board. The level of approval required shall be based
upon TPC as follows:




TPC > $4 million will require approval by the Board based on
recommendations from the Facilities and Land Management
Committee (F&LMC).
TPC > $2 million but ≤ $4 million will require approval by the
F&LMC.
TPC > $1 million but ≤ $2 million will require approval by the
Chairperson of the F&LMC.
TPC ≤ $1 million will require approval by the university’s Chief
Finance Officer (CFO) or designee.
RATIONALE / RECOMMENDATION
1.
Background
The Emily Brown Library building, NW008, was constructed in 1974 as
the original building for the Northwest Campus. The foundation consists
of 24 each 6” diameter steel pipes augered 13 feet down and consisting of
approximately 7 feet of fins (some underground).
In 1981, the Nagozruk building (NW001) was added to campus for
additional office and classroom space.
The Nagozruk building’s
foundation consists of 22 each 12” diameter steel pilings drilled to a depth
of 25 feet and contain a gas.
The Library building and Nagozruk building are adjacent to the ocean and
receive the battering of wind, sand and salt on their siding and pilings.
Over the years, the painted coating on the pilings has deteriorated and
allowed rust to eat away at the steel. The pilings were recoated in 2000,
which helped to prevent further deterioration. Since then, rust has found
its way through the coating and is again eroding the pilings.
Only one other building on the Northwest Campus has steel pilings:
NW016. This building was recently purchased by the university and
needs some recoating of its pilings, but they appear to be in good
structural shape.
Over time, the occupancy of the buildings on campus has changed, with
more people in less space with more computers, printers, faxes, etc. The
classroom buildings were never envisioned to hold computer labs, which
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 18 of 21
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
now are essential to learning and job training. Funds remaining after
repair of pilings will be used to correct electrical code issues, balance
electrical loads within the buildings and modify heating and ventilation
system to accommodate changes.
2.
Project Scope
The Library and Nagozruk buildings' piling are failing and must be
replaced. The Nagozruk building will be moved to provide access to the
area under the building for installation of new pilings then replaced on top
of the new pilings. A site investigation will be conducted to determine
appropriate locations, depth and style of pilings.
The new pilings for the Library will be placed near the satellite buildings.
This follows the long-range Master Plan for the campus and will provide
access to restrooms for the satellite buildings as well as a place for the
students to study before and after classes. Then, the structure will be
moved and placed on its new foundation.
A thorough analysis of the buildings electrical and space usage and needs
will be conducted in order to provide an upgraded electrical and HVAC
system throughout the campus.
3.
Proposed Cost and Funding Source(s)
Funding for this project comes from a state Capital Appropriation, with a
line item appropriation in the amount of $3,500,003.
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 19 of 21
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
4.
Estimated Total Project Cost
UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA
Project Name:
MAU:
Northwest Campus Deferred Renewal
UAF
Building:
NW001, NW008-NW010
Campus:
Northwest
Project #:
2009012 NWDR
Total GSF Affected by Project:
PROJECT BUDGET
A. Professional Services
Consultant Basic Services
Consultant Extra Services
Site Survey
Soils Engineering
Testing
Plan Review / Permits
Other
Professional Services Subtotal
B. Construction
General Contractor
Other Contractors (Voice/Data Installation)
Construction Contingency
Art
Other (Interim Space Needs)
Construction Subtotal
Construction Cost per GSF
C. Equipment and Furnishings
Equipment
Furnishings
Make Ready/Move In
Equipment and Furnishings Subtotal
D. Administrative Costs
Advance Planning
Misc. Expenses
Parking/Staging
Project Management
Administrative Costs Subtotal
E. Total Project Cost
Total Project Cost per GSF
F. Total Appropriation(s)
Date:
Prepared By:
Account No.:
8,960
August 14, 2008
C. Ward
571291-50216
(+ for electrical & HVAC overall)
Original
$125,000
$0
$0
$15,600
$0
$15,980
$0
$156,580
$2,751,000
$0
$247,590
$0
$0
$2,998,590
$334.66
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$13,540
$0
$331,293
$344,833
$3,500,003
$390.63
$3,500,003
5.
Maintenance and Operating Costs (M&R)
This project will address outstanding maintenance issues and resolve on
going problems thus reducing maintenance costs.
6.
Consultant(s)
Bezek-Durst-Seiser, Inc. has been selected as the lead consultant from our
pool of Term Consultants because of their familiarity with the campus and
its master plan. Shannon & Wilson, Inc. has been selected for the soil
testing and assessment.
7.
Schedule for Completion
Design
Bid Period
Anticipated construction period
Anticipated Beneficial Occupancy Date
August 2008-May 2009
June 2009
April 2010 – August 2010
mid-August 2010
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 20 of 21
Agenda
Facilities & Land Management Committee
September 18, 2008
Anchorage, Alaska
V.
Ongoing Issues
A.
Status Report on University Investments in Capital Facilities, Construction
in Progress, and Other Projects
Reference 9
Joe Trubacz, Chief Finance Officer, and campus facilities representatives
will update the committee regarding the ongoing investment in capital
facilities and answer questions regarding the status report on active
construction projects approved by the Board of Regents, implementation
of recommendations by the external consultants, functional use survey,
space utilization analysis, and other recent activity of note. This is an
information and discussion item; no action is required.
B.
Update on IT Issues
Reference 10
CITO Smith will report on IT issues of importance for the university
including an update on the status of online security review and
remediation across the system. He will also report on the Higher
Education Reauthorization Act in regards to online copyright infringement
(peer-to-peer file sharing), the impact to the university, and how the
system is preparing for implementation of this portion of the Act.
C.
Update on University of Alaska Fairbanks Master Plan
The University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) has been developing plans for
the most effective use of capital funding to meet its highest priority
facilities and infrastructure needs. In conjunction, UAF is incorporating
these plans into a Master Plan update. UAF anticipates requesting
approval of the Master Plan update at the December 2008 Board of
Regents' meeting.
UAF will provide information on its 2002 Master Plan, the current status,
and future plans. The future plans will include the proposed Life Sciences
Facilities, Engineering Addition, Energy and Power Facility, Student
Housing, Fire Station, and West Ridge Chilling along with any parking,
roads, utilities, or other infrastructure needs or related services.
VI.
Future Agenda Items
VII.
Adjourn
Facilities & Land Management Committee Agenda: Page 21 of 21